Equal Justice Foundation Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 841578107
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2025
- Location
- Colorado Springs, CO, USA
- Phone
- 7195201089
- Rating
- 86
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Spouse Abuse, Prevention
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $5,947
- Expenses
- $5,844
- Assets
- $551
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Charles E Corry PhD FGSA (President and Executive Director)
People named in this filing
- Charles E Corry PhD FGSA (President and Executive Director)
- Robert B Alvarez (Director)
- Steven Baskerville (Director)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Provide help, information and assistance to abused men and women. Work to provide fair, open and honest elections and develop standards for election voting equipment. Work to sustain and nourish children, families, and marriage.
What it reported doing in 2025
Work to ensure fair, open and honest elections and provide adequate standards and safe guards for electronic voting equipment. Also working with the IEEE P1622 voting equipment standards committee to develop standards for providing electronic ballots to overseas military and citizens.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Assets have declined or grown slowly and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 99
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 41
- Growth: 40
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 98.3%; rating input score 98
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 1.7%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.09; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -49.5% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 98.3% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $6K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
- People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 13/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 48/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.